@linguists such as Agamemnon, Kristiina and Pylsteen
I have a question with regard to Anatolian.
What I am curious about is the reasons why Anatolian languages are considered an old split. I do get that some leading consonants in some words are only retained in Anatolian languages which point to great time depth. The wikipage states that verbs have a far more simpler morphology, and basically state that Anatolian languages were less complicated.
If I recall correctly - and I might very well be wrong - the idea is that PIE developed innovations that Anatolians missed out on, because of the separation. But isn't that like stating that PIE became more complex in time? And how likely is such a development?
Second question is this: Are there good reasons to assume that the differences of Anatolian compared to late PIE is solely due to its early split, and not a local development? The spread of Anatolian languages looks to have been a completely different scenario than the spread of other IE languages. The idea that such a different spread might "simplify" a language does not seem unlikely to me
Reply With Quote